fix incorrect usd fee error when sending usdc #3458

JustinBeBoy · 2025-12-28T15:47:24Z

Close #3457

This PR:

fix incorrect usd fee error when sending usdc.
Add a polling-based scanner with block-range chunking to retrieve transaction history.

Screen Shot:

USD fee:

Transaction history

before:

after:

peterzen

LGTM. Thank you for working on this @JustinBeBoy .

JustinBeBoy · 2025-12-29T02:24:16Z

LGTM. Thank you for working on this @JustinBeBoy .

There's still an issue regarding the transaction history that I'm trying to resolve.

JoeGruffins · 2025-12-29T04:57:09Z

Looks good. I notice there is a usd price here for the base coin but not for the token. Under Amount. Can you try to fix it too?

JustinBeBoy · 2025-12-29T07:03:10Z

Looks good. I notice there is a usd price here for the base coin but not for the token. Under Amount. Can you try to fix it too?

Let me fix it.

JoeGruffins · 2025-12-29T07:03:51Z

I'm not sure the transactions not showing up is a bug. Will put more on the issue.

JoeGruffins · 2025-12-29T07:22:37Z

As @martonp said on the issue, we might not be able to get the incoming transactions. If you just fix the amounts with this pr it's fine. Maybe a note in the UI about not showing incoming transactions if you are ok with making that. Don't worry about it too much as may be impossible currently.

JustinBeBoy · 2025-12-30T03:58:27Z

Looks good. I notice there is a usd price here for the base coin but not for the token. Under Amount. Can you try to fix it too?

I've researched this issue, and it might not be a bug, but rather that rate sources could be disabled or failing (network error, API rate limit), hiding the USD element. It seems that stablecoins like USDC might not be supported by all APIs.

JoeGruffins · 2025-12-31T01:53:29Z

I've researched this issue, and it might not be a bug, but rather that rate sources could be disabled or failing (network error, API rate limit), hiding the USD element. It seems that stablecoins like USDC might not be supported by all APIs.

Ok no big deal. If it's not a bug just leave it.

JustinBeBoy · 2026-01-06T04:51:29Z

@JoeGruffins please help me review and test it.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR fixes a bug where the USD fee estimate was calculated incorrectly when sending USDC or other token assets. The issue occurred because tokens pay transaction fees in their parent asset (e.g., USDC on Polygon pays fees in MATIC), but the USD conversion was incorrectly using the token's fiat rate instead of the parent asset's rate.

Key Changes:

Fixed USD fee calculation to use the parent asset's fiat rate and unit info when sending tokens
Added polling-based transaction history scanner (per PR description, but not visible in provided diffs)

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

client/webserver/site/src/js/wallets.ts

JoeGruffins · 2026-01-07T01:54:13Z

client/asset/eth/eth.go

+		// Create IERC20 filterer to parse Transfer event
+		// We can pass nil for filterer since we're only parsing, not filtering
+		filterer, err := erc20.NewIERC20Filterer(w.tokenAddr, nil)
+		if err != nil {
+			return fmt.Errorf("error creating IERC20 filterer: %w", err)
+		}


It looks like filterer can be a field of the assetWallet and you don't need to make it every time just when creating the asset wallet.

JoeGruffins · 2026-01-07T01:56:48Z

client/asset/eth/eth.go

+		w.log.Errorf("Error getting last scan block for asset %d: %v", w.assetID, err)
+		return fmt.Errorf("error getting last scan block: %w", err)


Will this log twice? If so no need for the extra log.

JoeGruffins · 2026-01-07T02:03:59Z

client/asset/eth/eth_test.go

+	return nil
+}
+
+func (db *tTxDB) GetLastIncomingScanBlock(assetID *uint32) (uint64, error) {


Suggested change

func (db *tTxDB) GetLastIncomingScanBlock(assetID *uint32) (uint64, error) {

func (db *tTxDB) LastIncomingScanBlock(assetID *uint32) (uint64, error) {

Can leave out the Get in golang.

JoeGruffins · 2026-01-07T02:33:09Z

client/asset/eth/eth.go

+	// Scan incoming ETH transfers for base wallet
+	// Note: ETH scanning is expensive and may be skipped in production
+	// For now, we focus on token transfers which use event logs
+	if err := eth.scanIncomingETHTransfers(ctx, bestHdr.Number.Uint64()); err != nil {
+		eth.log.Errorf("Error scanning incoming ETH transfers: %v", err)
 	}


It looks like this doesn't do anything currently. Can remove all code related to it.

Scanning every block for transactions is not feasible. There are over 24 million blocks atm and the block time is 12 seconds. We MUST have the transactions already indexed, somehow, somewhere. Probably would need to just ask a block explorer.

JoeGruffins · 2026-01-07T02:41:33Z

client/asset/eth/eth.go

+		if tip > 1000 {
+			startBlock = tip - 1000
+		} else {
+			startBlock = 0


We are not scanning from block zero. That's 4,800 requests to the node if 5000 chunks and 24 million blocks. This is not feasible. Am I mistaking something?

It looks better than the eth transactions, but I think here too we need an indexer to query or it's just too much to have the wallet do.

Would like an opinion from @martonp on this

Oh sorry, it's only going 1000 blocks back if initial sync. It should be from the app birthday though... eth would be making 3600 blocks a day? idk...

JoeGruffins · 2026-01-07T03:03:16Z

client/asset/eth/eth.go

 	transactionReceipt(ctx context.Context, txHash common.Hash) (*types.Receipt, error)
 	transactionAndReceipt(ctx context.Context, txHash common.Hash) (*types.Receipt, *types.Transaction, error)
 	nonce(ctx context.Context) (confirmed, next *big.Int, err error)
+	FilterLogs(ctx context.Context, query ethereum.FilterQuery) ([]types.Log, error)


This would need to be lower case and go through *multiRPCClient which can be used to pick good providers.

fix incorrect usd fee error when sending usdc

42556ac

peterzen approved these changes Dec 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

add polling-based scanner với block-range chunking

d2037ec

JustinBeBoy marked this pull request as ready for review January 6, 2026 04:51

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings January 6, 2026 04:51

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of JustinBeBoy January 6, 2026 04:51 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jan 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

client/webserver/site/src/js/wallets.ts Show resolved Hide resolved

remove debug log and add unit test

af4a3bc

JustinBeBoy force-pushed the udsc_polygon_irregularities branch from b9894e1 to af4a3bc Compare January 6, 2026 08:05

fix test and optimize code

56181d4

JoeGruffins reviewed Jan 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

JoeGruffins requested a review from martonp January 7, 2026 02:42

JoeGruffins reviewed Jan 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

		w.log.Errorf("Error getting last scan block for asset %d: %v", w.assetID, err)
		return fmt.Errorf("error getting last scan block: %w", err)

	func (db tTxDB) GetLastIncomingScanBlock(assetID uint32) (uint64, error) {
	func (db tTxDB) LastIncomingScanBlock(assetID uint32) (uint64, error) {

fix incorrect usd fee error when sending usdc #3458

Are you sure you want to change the base?

fix incorrect usd fee error when sending usdc #3458

Conversation

JustinBeBoy commented Dec 28, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

peterzen left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JustinBeBoy commented Dec 29, 2025

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins commented Dec 29, 2025

Uh oh!

JustinBeBoy commented Dec 29, 2025

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins commented Dec 29, 2025

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins commented Dec 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JustinBeBoy commented Dec 30, 2025

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins commented Dec 31, 2025

Uh oh!

JustinBeBoy commented Jan 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

JustinBeBoy commented Dec 28, 2025 •

edited

Loading

peterzen left a comment •

edited

Loading

JoeGruffins commented Dec 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

JoeGruffins Jan 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading